LAYNE & BRILL, P.A.; LAYNE & BRILL PROPERTIES, INC.; LAYNE & BRILL, NORTH CAROLINA PROPERTIES, INC.; FRANKLIN TITLE SERVICES, INC.; RICHARD BERNSTEIN; AND B.J. LAYNE, APPELLANTS,
v.
HERBERT L. BRILL, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Injunctive Relief Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Stripped of immaterial factual considerations, this appeal raises a single question of law, i.e., whether a court may enter an injunction without prior notice of a hearing for that purpose, without factual findings in support of an injunction, and without providing for posting of a bond or setting forth reasons for waiving the bond requirement. We hold that it may not, on authority of Hotelerama Associates, Ltd. v. Bystrom, 449 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Oxford International Bank and Trust, Ltd. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 374 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. dismissed, 383 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 1980); Leopold v. Richard Bertram & Co., 265 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972); and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610. That part of the order on review which prohibits refinancing and/or modification of an existing mortgage is reversed.
REVERSED AND REMANDED for further consistent proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hinsley v. Whited, 623 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…ce. Bergman v. Bergman, 434 So. 2d 1037, 1038 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Additionally, an injunction will be reversed if the posting of a bond is not provided for or if reasons are not given for waiving this requirement. E.g., Layne & Brill, P.A. v. Brill, 453 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Crow, Pope & Carter, Inc. v. James, 349 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). There was no specific prohibition against moving the children in the final judgment, and the court’s only stated reason for preventing the children from leavi…
-
Fausto S. Capella v. The Coleman Inst., 707 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…PER CURIAM. We reverse the order granting a temporary injunction in this case because the posting of a bond was required and no reason was given for waiving it. See Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.610(b); Layne & Brill, P.A. v. Brill, 453 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); International Bhd. of Teamsters v. Miami Retail Grocers, Inc., 76 So. 2d 491 (Fla.1954). Courts have upheld the bond requirement in the context of a covenant not to compete, such as the one in the instant case. See Richard v. B…
-
Janelle v. Veterans Villas II Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. (Fla. 2d DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Oxford Int'l Bank & Tr., Ltd. v. Merrill Lynch, 374 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Harris v. Fla. Dep't OF Labor & Emp. Sec., 374 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Hotelerama Assocs., Ltd. v. Bystrom, 449 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Leopold v. Richard Bertram & Co., 265 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- McCOY v. Florida-Georgia Tractor Co., Inc., 265 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)